Month: August 2011

A Book Review

There are few books I have read that both entertained and disturbed me. The Grandest Deception by Dr. Jack Pruett is assuredly one of them.

From the preface, through the opening chapters and well into the book itself Dr. Pruett kept me turning the pages not only by heaving disquieting opinions this readerâ€™s way but also by hurling convincing â€“ if not totally unarguable points of view about politics, economics, extraterrestrials and UFOs, religion, mankindâ€™s origins and the nature of reality itself.

Where does one begin when one attempts to overthrow the belief system of an entire civilization? Dr. Pruett begins, â€˜In the beginningâ€¦â€™ by rattling civilizationâ€™s very core.

One of the core pillars of the Judeo-Christian belief system is the Bible. In essence the Bible has always been portrayed in ancient and modern times as the divine and historical relationship of God with mankind â€“ the Word of God. Countries have been founded on this premise; churches of all Christian denominations have used the Bible to disseminate the Word of God.

Irrespective of oneâ€™s belief system and according to biblical scholars from St. Thomas Aquinas to Billy Graham, the Bible represents the only divinely revealed foundation and guide depicting Godâ€™s relationship with mankind. Few other writings have predisposed humanityâ€™s intellectual, political and religious development in such an influential and pervasive manner.

Until now.

After a modest preface and without wasting too much of the readerâ€™s time Dr. Pruett states in the first chapter of his work: â€œThe Bible is not a story about God or the Supreme Being. The Bible is a story about the Annunaki. That my friend is the grandest deception and has far-reaching implications.â€

Dr. Pruettâ€™s book is essentially concerned with these far-reaching implications – the Annunakiâ€™s imposition of slavery on this newly created species to mine gold in servitude to a race of beings from a planet called Niburu.

One could well contend that this bold statement and the many interpretations that follow are abjectly frivolous or quixotic. However, coming from someone who at one time taught scripture, has graduated with a medical degree in obstetrics and gynecology and who has seen life emerge from the womb over five thousand times, the above statement about the Holy Book struck my mindâ€™s eye like a shaft of piercing lightâ€¦ I had to read more.

In addition to its central argument about the nature of the Bible, Dr. Pruettâ€™s work speaks to a whole host of global, historical and societal issues.

In detailing these issues Dr. Pruett employs an elaborate mixture of speculation and evidence to express his contention the planet and our civilization are essentially doomed. He argues the belief systems used to establish our civilization as a planetary genus are seriously flawed and, without a major reconstruction, we as a species are off to hell in a hand-basket.

Dr. Pruett weaves the threads of a grand deception through an historical tapestry; an alarming lattice of ideas many will dispute. However he quite adequately depicts our wanton and mounting incapacity to deal with an adversarial andÂ dysfunctionalÂ political and judicial system of governance. Pruett also points to humanity’s lethargy in excising the ascendancy and dominance exerted on all of us by a sinister and elitist economic system; one that fans the flames of warfare and ethnic violence.

The reader is left with the distinct impression that Dr. Pruett believes the primordial servitude imposed on mankind by the Annunaki and the slavery modern institutions engender at all levels, have spawned a citizenry deluded into believing everything will be â€˜just fineâ€™ if we just let the rich and powerful manage things while we all look the other way.

Moving from his primary premise that mankind was not created by a single god or multiple gods but was created by ancient astronauts from another planet, to his bold condemnations of the Federal Reserve, governments, religion, secret societies and other social institutions – Pruett quite effectively illustrates how the tapestry has become a web of incredulous deception. Even the figure in the New Testament known as Jesus Christ and His role in the deception does not escape the scrutiny of Dr. Pruett.

The book is divided into two parts: Part One – The Grandest Deception and Part Two â€“ The Grandest Rebellion. Part Two begins with a somber eye-opener that spirituality is not contingent upon a belief in a God or a Jesus. Dr. Pruett then suggests what amounts to insurrection by engaging humanity in a rebellion towards freedom by ridding America of the Federal Reserve Bank and the ruthless monetary gangliaÂ embeddedÂ in a global financial warfare system that has the planet in a strangle hold.

Dr. Pruett pulls no punches as he insists pervasive radical change is a terrestrial imperative. His invitation to readers to dialogue with him about this need for radical change illustrates not only his commitment to change but his drive to attain it.

Notwithstanding the earth-shaking journey that Dr. Pruett takes his readers in this provocative work, two things will occur. First, his analysis will be roundly criticized. Secondly, you will turn the pages as frenetically as I did to see where he takes you next on the journey. This book is indeed an act of political courage.

Tripoli has fallen to a rebel advance and freedom loving people in Libya and around the world are celebrating the fall of Muammar Gaddafi. A cause for celebration given Gaddafiâ€™s four decades old eccentric hold over Libya. Not so according to a giant in the alternative media – Alex Jones. Jones is a champion of the 911 Truth movement, and indeed the first to expose 911 as a false flag operation. Alex Jones has been at the forefront of efforts to warn the American public about the dangers of an unchecked police state, unfettered corporate power, secretive groups, and exploitative international banking. Jonesâ€™ websites, Infowars.com and Prisonplanet.com are filled with articles that broadly fall under the rubric of anti-globalism. Globalists, according to Jones and supporters, are those advocating the formation of a New World Order wherein government authority is centralized around the planet. A New World Order would be one wherein big government, big corporations and secretive organizations such as the Bilderberg Group dominate international politics and finances.

According to Jones, globalists use cherished U.S. Constitutional principles such as democracy and rule of law as fig leaves for the ever-steady effort to centralize life all over the planet into a future fascist, corporatist state. Thatâ€™s why the Arab Spring, where young Arab protestors overthrow despots who have held power for decades, is criticized by Jones as a sham. The real agenda is to remove Arab dictators opposed to globalists now ready to expand into the Arab world in order to promote international banking, corporate penetration, etc.

Jones stance on the Arab Spring and support for dictators appears odd at first given mainstream media coverage of events in Libya, Egypt, Syria and elsewhere, but is consistent with the anti-globalism Jones espouses. For Jones, better the little devil of Arab dictators firmly controlling their populations, than the big devil of globalists adding the Arab world to their international balance sheets. So the big question becomes, is Jones right? In many respects, Jones is insightful in his geo-political analysis, yet fails in a major way to understand the underlying dynamics driving international politics and events such as the Arab Spring. He fails to seriously consider the question of extraterrestrial life, and how an exopolitics perspective would change the way we view geo-political events.

Alex Jones, like many media personalities with large listening audiences, has largely sidestepped the question of extraterrestrial life. Jones has avoided immersing himself into controversies of whether or not extraterrestrial life is visiting our world and whether a â€œCosmic Watergateâ€ is occurring. Instead, he has considered the possibility that a fake alien invasion can be staged, and has publicly commented about an alien false flag operation. Jones position here is both consistent and cautious. He acknowledges that a false flag operation featuring alien life could be done with holographic technologies, without acknowledging that extraterrestrial life is real and is being covered up. In this cautious way, Jones has introduced his audience to the alien issue, but solely in the context of a possible future false flag operation. This is where Jonesâ€™ caution prevents him from seeing the bigger picture. That is visiting extraterrestrial life has been interacting with governments, corporations, military and private citizens for at least six decades. The policies implemented to shield all this from the world public all fall under the rubric of â€˜exopoliticsâ€™ â€“ the politics of extraterrestrial life.

The field of exopolitics is vast in its implications across all aspects of human life, and directly impacts on Jonesâ€™ central concern of the dangers of globalism. For Jones, globalism is driven by the avarice of international bankers and transnational corporations wanting to penetrate and control new markets and populations. Thatâ€™s true to an extent, and we have much to learn from Jones and his supporters in that regard. If Jones, however, peeled back the onion layers a little more he would find a deeper dynamic behind globalism. A powerful factor behind globalism is the need for those in control of the extraterrestrial issue â€“ to gain control over any extraterrestrial artifacts, knowledge or contacts found throughout the planet. The best way of understanding exopolitics is to consider that for at least six decades, major governments and militaries have worked secretly together to gain intelligence and conduct counter-intelligence on extraterrestrial life and technology. In addition, covert operations have been led around the planet wherever any information, technology or contact with extraterrestrials has occurred.

Organizations such as the Bilderburg Group, Council of Foreign Relations, etc., have played key roles by providing the intellectual firepower on how such a network of intelligence, counter-intelligence and covert operations can be conducted without the worldâ€™s populations learning about it. Globalism, in that respect, provides a very useful process for being able to conduct such operations across international borders. More importantly, international cooperation on the extraterrestrial issue has led to the creation of a â€œbreakaway civilizationâ€ in highly classified underground and undersea bases. According to some credible sources, there are even human colonies on the moon, Mars and beyond. For many readers that might appear to be sheer science fiction. Yet once thorough research is conducted, the conclusion is inescapable.

The existence of a breakaway civilization is one of the great failings of contemporary world politics, and especially for progressive thinkers who have eschewed serious discussion of the extraterrestrial issue. The most advanced technologies known to humanity have been secretly developed and used in vast network of classified projects without any kind of oversight by representative government institutions, media or population. So where does Jones and his take on the dangers of globalism fit into this exopolitics picture?

Globalism is simply a process that can be used for good or evil depending on how it is managed by those with the most influence in directing and controlling it. In making globalism the big devil of the progressive movement and alternative media, Jones errs. He makes the profound mistake of not recognizing that it is how globalism is currently being managed that is the problem. Globalism can be a very good thing in monitoring and regulating international practices, especially when it comes to introducing transparency and accountability into the classified programs that have been conducted for decades around the planet. Humanity has a need-to-know what technologies have been secretly developed. This will require transparency not only in classified military programs; but, more importantly, classified corporate programs around the planet that defy oversight by any government or military agency. In the United States alone, the amount of black budget funds siphoned by the CIA into this network of deep black programs was estimated to be up to 1.7 trillion a year over the three year period from 1998 to 2000.

The reflexive anti-globalist stance, taken by Alex Jones and supporters has the unintended consequence of facilitating the continued secrecy that makes possible classified military and corporate programs across international borders. An anti-globalist ‘every country mind-their-own business’ approach encourages opacity and unaccountability across international borders. Anti-globalism eschews international cooperation and the strengthening of multilateral institutions such as the United Nations and International Criminal Court. At the same time, one needs to be wary that globalism is not hijacked in order to facilitate corporations and military programs seeking to secretly manage even more extraterrestrial information and contact all over the planet. Done correctly, globalism can help expose and bring to account those responsible for hiding how advanced extraterrestrial technologies have been secretly developed and used.

Supporting peoples struggling for democratic governments such as we are witnessing in Libya, Syria and other Arab Spring countries is an important means for promoting transparency and accountability across international borders. Alex Jones reflexive anti-globalist agenda not only unintentionally supports recalcitrant dictators in the Arab world, but also aids those that have secretly controlled a vast complex of secret projects and covert operations focused on extraterrestrial life and technology. The world has a need-to-know what has secretly happened behind the closed doors of highly classified compartmentalized alien related projects spanning the globe. We should not be afraid of globalism. Wisely embraced, globalism can bring about the kind of transparency and accountability across international borders needed to protect humanityâ€™s freedoms well into the 21st century

Extraterrestrial contact where humanity is almost destroyed to protect the ecosystem

There has been a flurry of recent stories by The Guardian and other major world media about the possible benefits or harm that may occur after contact with advanced extraterrestrial civilizations. The stories were sparked by a scientific study published in the June/July edition of Acta Astronautica. Titled, â€œWould Contact with Extraterrestrials Benefit or Harm Humanity? A Scenario Analysisâ€ the study examines a number of scenarios concerning extraterrestrial contact. It adopts the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) paradigm that intelligent extraterrestrial life has not yet been discovered, and that scientific modalities such as radio signals are among the most feasible ways of establishing communications. The study examines the FERMI paradox, first established by Enrico Fermi, that alien life should be abundant in our galaxy, but he asked â€œwhere are they?â€

Responses to the Fermi Paradox by the authors leads to three possible scenarios. The last scenario examined is the Zoo hypothesis that Aliens may be studying us remotely or invisibly, reminiscent of the non-interference principle popularized by the Star Trek series as the Prime Directive. They explain: â€œETI are treating Earth like a wildlife preserve to be observed but not fully incorporated into the Galactic Club.â€

The main purpose of the study (which I’ll abbreviate as “A Scenario Analysis” – full paper is here) is to answer the question: â€œIf contact between humans and ETI is possible, then it is important to consider the capability of ETI to cause us benefit or harmâ€ (p.6) In stressing the importance of the question, they go on to point out: â€œwe do have a compelling reason to believe that ETI would be significantly stronger than us and therefore highly capable of causing our total destruction.â€

The authors go on to consider extraterrestrial ethics. They write:

If ETI are significantly more advanced than humanity, then the outcome of contact may depend primarily on ETI desires. However, this leaves open speculation as to the specific desires of ETI and raises the question of what ethical framework they follow. Much can be said about ETI ethics. Here we focus on one key aspect: selfishness vs. universalism (p. 7).

In response, the authors examine three broad motivations or ethics of extraterrestrials. Basically, extraterrestrials would fall into categories of the good, the bad, or the indifferent leading to three broad scenarios. Considerable discussion is given to each scenario, and the benefits or harm to humanity. Of special interest is the possibility that â€œgood extraterrestrialsâ€, may decide to wipe out humanity for a higher good such as preserving the eco-system. This frightening scenario was vividly demonstrated in the 2008 remake of the Sci-Fi Classic, The Day the Earth Stood Still.

â€œWould Contact with Extraterrestrials Benefit or Harm Humanity? A Scenario Analysisâ€ is a very useful summary of a priori speculations about extraterrestrial life. It is the latest in a series of scientific speculations about contact with extraterrestrial life. Recent scientific discoveries such as exoplanets in habitable regions of solar systems, abundance of water found in our solar system, and the ability of life to flourish in extreme biological conditions has stimulated scientific curiosity about the possibility of extraterrestrial life. This inevitably leads to questions about the motivations of advanced extraterrestrial life after contact with them is made by SETI or other means.

What “A Scenario Analysis” fails to do is to actively engage with the more than abundant evidence that humanity is currently being visited by extraterrestrial life. In the abstract, the authors categorically state: â€œhumanity has not yet observed any extraterrestrial intelligence.â€ Yet there is an incredible amount of physical evidence concerning sightings of UFOs under intelligent control displaying flight characteristics far above what is known to be possible in conventional or even classified aerospace research. In addition, there are also numerous whistleblower reports concerning crashes of UFOs, and retrievals of extraterrestrial biological entities. Finally, there are also first hand witness reports of contacts, both voluntary and involuntary, with extraterrestrial entities. Rather than acknowledge the existence of such evidence, the scientific study chooses to dismiss it all together adopting the well known SETI perspective that no extraterrestrial contact has yet been made.

In failing to even acknowledge the extensive literature that contact has already been made, and that a successful cover-up has occurred by select government, military, corporate actors, “A Scenario Analysis”is taking an unrealistic stance. Basically, it is ignoring the possibility that UFOlogy and exopolitical literature may contribute substantially to answering the main goal of the authors in answering whether extraterrestrial contact would be more harmful or beneficial to humanity.

It is encouraging to see an increasing number of scientists openly engage with scientific, social, political and even economic consequences of the discovery of extraterrestrial life. Ongoing scientific discoveries make it clear that the conditions for the life flourish throughout the galaxy. This makes scientific curiosity over the motivations of intelligent extraterrestrial life inevitable. Encouraging scientific speculation on the basis of what can be deduced from NASA and other Space Agency press releases or peer reviewed scientific journals should not require an outright dismissal of the abundant literature from the fields of UFOlogy and exopolitics that extraterrestrial contact has already occurred. It would be basically advocating the very unscientific approach that a priori reasoning on the benefits and harm of extraterrestrial contact should be encouraged, while simultaneously dismissing all a posteriori evidence and arguments concerning the benefits and harm of such contact. If the Zoo Hypothesis is the more accurate answer to the Fermi Paradox, the authors of â€œA Scenario Analysisâ€ might have to acknowledge that they might be among the majority of Zoo dwellers that have been kept in the dark by their Zoo keepers about who might be watching them